Spherical & Triaxial

(1) What quality of data are required to determine the mass profile? (2) How can we best break the degeneracy between velocity anisotropy and mass? (3) How badly do we do if we assume spherical symmetry but the galaxy is actually triaxial?

Priority order of runs

We realise that the above mocks about to a very large number of tests which for some methods may be prohibitive. For this reason, if you can only run some of the tests the priority order is as follows:

Results

Results from running the above using a variety of techniques can be found here.

Discussion

Gary

Questions on outputs

Accuracy of outputs (say 3 digits or more after the decimal point. The poor accuracy of the example is misleading).

Methods ought to provide important numbers as well as profiles:

* inner DM slope

* inner stellar slope

* half-projeted-mass radius ( in ellitpical galaxy parlance) and uncertainty (although one could numerically estimate it by fitting and projecting).

Should we provide maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) values of the profiles as well? This seems relevant for the DM density profiles of (core DM) models, for which the median slope is not 0, but the MLE slope is.

Could add and (line-of-sight and aperture terms for the γ-ray emission from DM annihilation).

Questions on comparisons of methods

Do we wish to make quantitative comparisons between methods, or simply compare them graphically?

If we wish to make quantitative comparisons, which measures shall we use?